NASA study finds life-sparking energy source and molecule at Enceladus • Hacker News Board

Re: NASA study finds life-sparking energy source and molecule at Enceladus

#181

Post by ajmurmann » Sun, Dec 17, 2023, 1:53 PM UTC

dieselgate wrote: post #172

ajmurmann wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is this super cool phenomenon where pairs of matter and antimatter will spontaneously come into existence in a vacuum and then neutralize itself. I always liked to intuitively connect that with an equation that looks really complicated, but just comes out to 0 = 0 when you simplify it. Add to that cellular automata that based on extremely simple rules can show mindblowing outcomes. I feel these things together…

You mentioned some good things but also cast a large net. Are you referring to the Casimir Effect? Am just vaguely familiar with some of the general concepts but very much recommend this video on the topic, by a Prof/physicist "Casimir Effect and Black Holes" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRcmqZkGOK4

Yeah, reading about the Casimir effect seems like that's what I remembered. I hadn't read about it since it was covered in high school 20+ years ago. And yes, this entire line of thought is more an intuition than even a theory. But having something at all appear in a vacuum and seeing how complexity can arise from very simple rules is such an inspiring combination to me.

Re: NASA study finds life-sparking energy source and molecule at Enceladus

#182

Post by jdthedisciple » Sun, Dec 17, 2023, 2:03 PM UTC

NineStarPoint wrote: post #162

ryanSrich wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we're just having fun here, then I'd say it doesn't have a creator. Which is not a concept humans are capable of understanding. It could be the demiurge is eternal, forever and always. The concept of time may have been an invention by such a creator.

Sure, but time isn’t necessary for a causal chain. Even if from the perspective of the demigurge it has always existed, in some causal (or anti-causal depending on the laws outside our reality) way it must have spontaneously come in to being (Or, if the demiurge was created from another being, eventually the chain of causation comes back to some being spontaneously coming into existence). You can’t avoid the “somethi…

The human perspective is not the correct/absolute reference frame.

The Creator must not have "come from nothing". Him always existing as the ultimate entity - even before/outside the existence of time itself - is not difficult a concept for us to grasp.

Re: NASA study finds life-sparking energy source and molecule at Enceladus

#183

Post by Jeff_Brown » Sun, Dec 17, 2023, 2:10 PM UTC

NineStarPoint wrote: post #160

holoduke wrote: post #84

The fact that there is something, just something can drive me crazy. Why is there something and not just nothing.

In the end, if you go all the way back through the chain of causation (whatever causation even looks like outside of the bounds of reality we know within our universe), whatever it is that resulted in our universe (whether it be the big bang or a god or alien that created the bing bang or a higher being that created said god or alien)…at some point, something must have come from nothing. It’s the only inevitable trut…

I don't see why it should feel bothersome.

To ask what came before the first moment is to apply a concept, time, where it no longer applies.

Similarly, suppose you knew everything. No matter what it was, how much information it was, you'd still be able to ask, "What's beyond that?" But being able to form those words doesn't imply the question means anything.

Re: NASA study finds life-sparking energy source and molecule at Enceladus

#184

Post by berniedurfee » Sun, Dec 17, 2023, 2:21 PM UTC

superposeur wrote: post #6

This is intriguing and I’m very happy this exploration is being done. But, for decades, I’ve been reading reports of the discovery of evidence for the trappings of life elsewhere: water and organics and “habitable” exoplanets. These are valuable discoveries, but the tone of the reports suggest they imply life is about to turn up. It’s worth remembering that there is not one single shred of evidence that life has ever…

But we barely know anything about how life on our own works, much less came about. We barely know anything concrete about anything.

We’re just hairless (mostly) apes running amok having discovered how to trap fire inside little bits of copper and sand.

We’ll look as primitive to our descendants in 10,000 years as our ancestors of 10,000 years look to us.

I guess I’m saying that, I think, our views on the universe and life are only very slightly more accurate than they were when those ancestors were painting what they saw in caves.

I think our hubris tells us we understand far more than we do. I think if you take that into account, the possibility for life existing elsewhere in the universe is an absolute fact.

I surmise, that for us to think that we’re the only sentient life in the unimaginably vast universe is the ultimate manifestation of our drive for self-preservation.

We want to survive and propagate our DNA above all else, therefor we must be vigilant against all threats, therefor if we consider ourselves at the center of the universe, we can be sure to never neglect anything that might indeed be a threat.

The problem with this instinct is that it clouds our conscious judgement into thinking that the universe does indeed revolve around us and then we make conclusions according to that fallacy.

I think life in the universe is as ubiquitous as rocks. It’s everywhere in all manner of forms and sophistication. We just won’t have the tools to see or hear it for maybe a couple hundred years or so. But once we do, we’ll have a chuckle at how we could be so arrogant as a species to ever think we were alone.

Re: NASA study finds life-sparking energy source and molecule at Enceladus

#185

Post by superposeur » Sun, Dec 17, 2023, 3:26 PM UTC

NotSammyHagar wrote: post #176

superposeur wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These factors are what I call the “trappings of life”. It is a completely open question (and I mean completely ) how likely life is to arise spontaneously when these factors are present. One single instance of life elsewhere or successful abiogenesis in the lab would change that, but we have neither.

I went to a biology/astronomy talk where there was a researcher working on the sequence of chemical changes on the early earth without much water or atmosphere would need to create dna base pairs. It was stunning because they basically had a sequence of things and geological discoveries point toward the precursor chemicals being available. It's not that dna was just there. This is not "life arising spontaneously". Th…

The “eventually build dna base pairs” (that continue self replicating) is the uncertain and possibly ludicrously improbable step. See for instance https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-58060-0 which argues for a probability per exoplanet small enough that it hasn’t happened a second time in the observable universe. On the other hand, one of the self-organizing proposals cited elsewhere in this thread may turn out to be correct and the probability may be much higher.

The point is that, while there are some cool ideas on the table, everything hinges on the particular value of this probability (not just a qualitative story of how life might have arisen) and we don’t know what it is. Still relevant: https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cross-check/pssst-dont-...

Re: NASA study finds life-sparking energy source and molecule at Enceladus

#186

Post by gls2ro » Sun, Dec 17, 2023, 4:39 PM UTC

throwaway290 wrote: post #171

vlovich123 wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To me the simpler question is “if life didn’t originate from inorganic conditions somehow, what other explanation is there? Life came into being with the creation of the universe?”. It’s possible the latter explanation is what happened, it just feels extremely unlikely. So the more likely explanation is that life originates from inorganic conditions. Then the question is where? Is it on a planet or in space? Pansperm…

> To me the simpler question is “if life didn’t originate from inorganic conditions somehow, what other explanation is there? Life came into being with the creation of the universe?”. OK let's pretend to forget for a moment that we have no definition for "life". Here is what we know: - tons of examples of life turning into non-life - zero examples of non-life turning into life - a crapton of non-life around us Based…

Hm what if you add a forth known:

- a lot of examples where life exists where we were thinking it should not be possible

I think it raises a bit the idea that life is in a way special and fragile at individual level but not that fragile as a whole.

Re: NASA study finds life-sparking energy source and molecule at Enceladus

#187

Post by qqtt » Sun, Dec 17, 2023, 5:36 PM UTC

superposeur wrote: post #132

qqtt wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Moreover, no one has succeeded in hatching living matter from non living matter and we must honestly say we do not know how this process came about or the faintest estimate of how likely it is to occur (despite much speculation Just want to comment on this point. The research in this field is pretty esoteric. It doesn't really benefit us to understand how this process came about (ie, there is little practical gain…

It is “important to remember” precisely because these days people are not remembering this and speak with a sense of inevitability about discovering life elsewhere, which sense of inevitability is totally unsupported. I may gently point out, your own post says “it is only a matter of time before science can connect the dots”, reflecting this (in my view) distorted sense. The abiogenesis research you cite is absolutel…

> It is “important to remember” precisely because these days people are not remembering this and speak with a sense of inevitability about discovering life elsewhere

Could you expand on this a bit. Whether someone speaks with a sense of inevitability or not, why is it important either way? Why is it "important" to remind people we haven't (yet) found life on other planets?

Why are the existing gaps in abiogenesis "important" to point out?

What is so "important" about these things?

Re: NASA study finds life-sparking energy source and molecule at Enceladus

#188

Post by marcosdumay » Sun, Dec 17, 2023, 5:44 PM UTC

idlewords wrote: post #22

superposeur wrote: post #6

This is intriguing and I’m very happy this exploration is being done. But, for decades, I’ve been reading reports of the discovery of evidence for the trappings of life elsewhere: water and organics and “habitable” exoplanets. These are valuable discoveries, but the tone of the reports suggest they imply life is about to turn up. It’s worth remembering that there is not one single shred of evidence that life has ever…

I would turn your logic around and say, everywhere we are able to look, we find evidence that life is more likely than expected. Until the 1990's it was an open question whether any other star had planets; as soon as we got the tools to test that, we found they were ubiquitous. As soon as we got the right instruments to Mars, we found signs of moving water, methane sources, and complex organic molecules in what is ba…

> we find evidence that life is more likely than expected

The easy steps for abiogenesis keep getting easier and easier.

Meanwhile, we keep having absolutely no idea of the difficulty of the hard steps. Yes, technically that means life is easier than we expected, by some completely insignificant margin.

Re: NASA study finds life-sparking energy source and molecule at Enceladus

#189

Post by yoble » Sun, Dec 17, 2023, 6:38 PM UTC

725686 wrote: post #24

For anyone interested in the origin of life, and the origin of complex life I highly recommend Nick Lane's Books. You can start with "The Vital Question". There are also some fantastic videos of him online.

Seconding this, as a layman I've found his books both technical and fascinating. He's a great teacher, getting into the details but explaining in a really engaging manner.

Re: NASA study finds life-sparking energy source and molecule at Enceladus

#190

Post by ynlefevre » Sun, Dec 17, 2023, 6:42 PM UTC

donny2018 wrote: post #123

idlewords wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would turn your logic around and say, everywhere we are able to look, we find evidence that life is more likely than expected. Until the 1990's it was an open question whether any other star had planets; as soon as we got the tools to test that, we found they were ubiquitous. As soon as we got the right instruments to Mars, we found signs of moving water, methane sources, and complex organic molecules in what is ba…

“England has developed a hypothesis of the physics of the origins of life, that he calls "dissipation-driven adaptation."[3][5] The hypothesis holds that random groups of molecules can self-organize to more efficiently absorb and dissipate heat from the environment. His hypothesis states that such self-organizing systems are an inherent part of the physical world.[7]” If Jeremy England’s hypothesis is true, then life…

[dead]